Quantifying
a city’s influence on a cultural form such as music is challenging because the
debate hinges on a variety of factors: the social, economical, and political
climates of the area, the legendary figures of that scene, and the development
of the music itself. While New York may have produced more figureheads than
Chicago—Duke Ellington, Fats Waller, James P. Johnson, Art Tatum—New York seems
a sidestep in the evolution of swing and jazz.
Jazz’s
move from New Orleans to Chicago began with King Oliver, who sparked the first
wave of innovation on the jazz formula. He took the group-performance ethos of
Storyville jazz and, upon bringing it to Chicago, made it an individual’s
medium (1.31 Lecture). King Oliver’s sound transformed the softer,
brothel-oriented New Orleans style with a sound that was bigger, brassier, more
aggressive, that prominently featured the soloist, and was engineered for
Chicago’s decidedly livelier dance pavilions. Improvisation was encouraged, as
bands would play well into the night, and the range of jazz was broadened and
deepened. Though stride piano, developed in New York, encouraged improvisation,
I believe stride acts as an amplifier of previously existing forms, rather than
as a brand new element that existed outside of ragtime or jazz (as Gioia
suggests of New York on page 106). However, I do acknowledge the dialogic
aspect of stride piano as a reaction to and addition to jazz.
The
Chicago Race Riot of 1919 had social and economical ramifications for the
following decades, which defined how jazz spread both within and without the
city. Segregation between blacks and whites applied to music venues, allowing
blacks access to black-only music venues, while whites were allowed to attend
any performance they pleased (Gioia 55). The Austin High Gang, a popular
all-white jazz group, copped their style from watching King Oliver and Louis
Armstrong play in a black neighborhood. The kids lacked the musical maturity or
clarity of their influences (Bix Beiderbeck being one of them), their jazz hit
“Nobody’s Sweetheart” became a huge hit, selling thousands of records (The
Chicagoans 158). As a result, white
audiences began listening to and actively seeking jazz, which was previously
associated with vices (Lecture 1.31). Thusly, the jazz scene took hold of
Chicago and transcended racial boundaries.
Both
Chicago and New York were controlled by the mob scene in the late 1920s, but
Chicago ultimately favored jazz musicians. Mobsters controlled jazz musicians
in terms of their wages, where they would play, and when they would play. This
mutated form of slavery, though highly restrictive, tended to favor Chicago’s
jazz musicians more than New York’s, in a roundabout way. Duke Ellington’s
received heavy radio play because he signed away fifty percent of the rights to
his music to his manager Irving Mills, thereby losing much of his profit (2.12
Lecture). Also, New York had a much higher concentration of Italians, many of
who were mobsters that controlled jazz performers (The Jazz Slave Masters 49).
I really liked how you kept New York in your post, comparing the two frequently to reinforce your points. I think you could have gone into more detail about Chicago style jazz and the how Armstrong influenced it. Otherwise I think you hit many great points, particularly about the race division. I enjoyed your views on the Austin High Gang's influence and their role in the evolution of jazz.
ReplyDelete